Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
To follow the Constitution, one must recognize and defend the right’s of one’s fellow citizens, including when citizens exercise their rights in a manner one might disapprove of – whether it’s having an abortion or seeking to possess an AR 15.Pot calling the kettle black... you are such a hypocrite it is astonishing!
Utterly false.
Fringe movements in various states to legalize pot may have been started by Hippies in the 60's. But serious decriminalization was driven by Libertarian minded Republicans - while democrats opposed marijuana legalization.
The idea that the people can decide the issue of abortion outrages democrats. People deciding? Instead of our rulers? Who came up with such an idea? Letting people vote on issues destroys our democracy. Rule by the central authority is the heart of democracy. Democracy will end our democracy - only dictatorship can save democracy. Uber Alles Democrat
Conservatives are supposed to be ‘advocates’ of ‘small government.’
An actual conservative consistent in his application of ‘small government’ dogma would oppose both ‘bans’ on abortion and ‘bans’ on assault weapons.
‘Small government’ is far much more than just reckless, irresponsible tax cuts and deregulation.
But there are no actual, consistent conservatives – there are only dishonest hypocrites.
Shut up you know nothing about the constitution. You are a black supremacists. I bet you support the welfare mom and her ex-con criminal boyfriend in the NYC bodega self-defense case. So buzzer off!To follow the Constitution, one must recognize and defend the right’s of one’s fellow citizens, including when citizens exercise their rights in a manner one might disapprove of – whether it’s having an abortion or seeking to possess an AR 15.
Lol read what we are sending them. Sophisticated guidance systems, high grade military gear, munitions, anti-tank weapons… none of which are legal to own in the us right now and rightfully so!Dumbass you do realize the small arm weapons is what they needed?
Nope… I support a new amendment to the constitution. Later amendments can nullify earlier amendments!You're an anti-constitutional gun grabber. It doesn't get more lefty than that.
Lol… I always hear this, but when any anti-government group (including ones that are armed to the teeth) are confronted, they lose without much of a fight.This is a pretty new thread and I'm already 24 pages behind so I am sure this has been said but let me pile on.
All of the police, all of the military, are nothing in numbers compared to the numbers of trained gun owners, veterans, and others. Your claim that the government could not be beaten is absurd unless you support Biden's plan to nuke his own people. So the numbers and the weapons are meaningless.
The deep state intelligence and spy networks are also meaningless. If the left tries to overthrow the people or the Constitution, I have no need to coordinate or plan with others. I know my part: take out more of the enemy than they do of me. By attrition, the Constitution wins.
Don't worry; the Constitution is safe. Tyranny is not.
January 20 2020, 27,000 armed Americans showed up on the VA capitol grounds to protest pending anti-gun legislation.It makes you sound mentally challenged.
Having guns is not going to protect you from the police or military.
If true: So?No, the only reason you want certain guns (such as a AR-15) is because you like to have them.
Your opinion doesn't matter.If you want to hunt, then a single shot hunting rifle will suffice. If it is about home defense, then handguns and shotguns (which as both short-range) would be sufficient.
"No"There should be a ban on all guns other then single shot hunting rifles, handguns and shotguns.
Why do you think 38 states will agree?Nope… I support a new amendment to the constitution. Later amendments can nullify earlier amendments!
Yep, that's what I told the Vietcong, the Taliban, and the Iraqi insurgents.Lol… I always hear this, but when any anti-government group (including ones that are armed to the teeth) are confronted, they lose without much of a fight.
In modern society and with modern technology, armed groups have little chance of upending even third world dictatorship, much less the most power government in the planet.
And they were begging for any weapon they could get. You need small arms to protect those nice cool defense systemsLol read what we are sending them. Sophisticated guidance systems, high grade military gear, munitions, anti-tank weapons… none of which are legal to own in the us right now and rightfully so!
Please let me know what the duck you’re talking about. I didn’t mention weed.What does smoking marijuana or anything else for that matter, have to do with committing an act of murder? How do you equate the two?
But, they won't be consuming the products produced by automation, because they can't afford it. Because no jobs.We will always consume. What won't exist are paying consumers. Consumers will always exist, as long as we are living in the physical world.
"Small" is the wrong word. LIMITED is what libertarian-minded people want.Conservatives are supposed to be ‘advocates’ of ‘small government.’
An actual conservative consistent in his application of ‘small government’ dogma would oppose both ‘bans’ on abortion and ‘bans’ on assault weapons.
‘Small government’ is far much more than just reckless, irresponsible tax cuts and deregulation.
But there are no actual, consistent conservatives – there are only dishonest hypocrites.
There is no ban on abortion.
Nazi democrats like Saul Goodman hate democracy. That the SCOTUS returned the issue to the states so that the people could vote on the issue and decide what is right for them in a democratic fashion outrages democrats.
Democracy is a threat to our democracy, say the fascist democrats.
But, they won't be consuming the products produced by automation, because they can't afford it. Because no jobs.
Thus, the automation producers have no one capable of paying for those products. Thus, failure.
They main arguments for UBI are not based in real thought or examination.
technology makes none of that possible or plausible. It is nothing more than the same old tired worn out and disproven marxist claims with a technotwist.We're not for UBI. Technology will make working 20 hours a week, five days weekly possible. You can keep your current home, all of your personal property. You won't work for a wage, because the capitalist system where you have a boss and they hire you for a wage..That's the old capitalist system. The new system, is you join a production team. That production team is led by people elected by the workers and you and I will still work, at least 20 hours weekly. Everyone that can work, will work supervising the system. Maybe you'll work four hours daily at the mine, supervising the mining robots. Maybe you will work as a drone operator, piloting high-speed drones that monitor convoys of self-driving 18-wheelers? Maybe you'll work as a physician or nurse, as part of a children's surgical team, that supervises surgical robots. at children's hospitals? Maybe you'll work in a factory supervising the robots that build robots? Maybe you'll work as a police officer, leading a team of patrol robots? Maybe after work, you'll go to the motorcycle shop as I will do, to work on our motorcycles. Maybe you like riding a motorcycle as I do, and we'll ride as part of a club.
Maybe you'll see other people riding their motorcycles and you'll be like "I want to ride a motorcycle"...and you'll go to the distribution center and get your motorcycle. You have a right to get a motorcycle for yourself, and your husband will also have that right. Both of you can now ride motorcycles. Heck your whole family can ride motorcycles. That's the new world we will live in thanks to technology. You and I will have a very high standard of living thanks to technology. We will socialize, democratize production. Capitalism with that little dictator over you, treating you like you're some cog in a machine, all of that is in the past. Socialism is the inevitable consequence of high tech production. No more wage labor, but so what? We don't need wages when we have everything, thanks to technology. We put in a little work, 20 hours weekly and that's it, we live the equivalent of an upper-middclass lifestyle.
Please let me know what the duck you’re talking about. I didn’t mention weed.
I was pointing out that the Roe foundation was a “right to privacy.” It is a stupid basis on which to claim a right to have an abortion. The rest you can work out.
No. I’m assuming that at conception, a human’s spermatozoon and a human’s ovum become life. And the resulting life will never be anything other than human. And I am saying that the Constitution protects the right to life.You're assuming abortion is murder. That's the issue. You can deny women the right to determine whether they remain pregnant or not and force them to go through the pregnancy but if most people in society don't want to force women to remain pregnant, and give birth to unwanted children, then abortion will remain legal in most states. In a socialist, Marxist democracy, abortion is a right. Women choose what they want to do with respect to their pregnancies.
As evidenced by the univerally-recognized fact the only time someone has the right to end a human life is in the act of self-defense.No. I’m assuming that at conception, a human’s spermatozoon and a human’s ovum become life. And the resulting life will never be anything other than human. And I am saying that the Constitution protects the right to life.
Or defense of another. Or a legal execution. Or in time of war. But again, your point still stands.As evidenced by the univerally-recognized fact the only time someone has the right to end a human life is in the act of self-defense.
